Wall Observer BTC/USD - Bitcoin price movement tracking & discussion

[octaft]

It's nice to know moderators are useless on this forum.

Luckily ignore functions as it should.

Doesn't change the fact that they're useless now does it?

Why do you feel like the mods are useless?

Do you even have eyes?

Yes. Now then, why do you feel like the mods are useless?

[janos666]

Are there fully working Bitcoin wallets for Android, iOS and Windows Phone (true trustless wallet with sending capabilities)?

Maybe this is what you want.

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=de.schildbach.wallet

Hmm. I wasn't aware of this software. It isn't listed at https://bitcoin.org/en/download and I don't spend Bitcoins (I am trading with some, holding a few on ice, but not spending - I don't even have opportunities here to do so).

[conspirosphere.tk]

Just imagine if it cost a dollar to print a dollar

i think there is no contest in energy and resources cost. Under any conceivable scenario fiat is cheaper than POW (for the printers).
Moreover your case about high real TX cost implies constant price, which is unlikely after many halvenings. And dirt cheap TX cost is not the btc killer app anyway imho.

[idecable]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

[NotLambchop]

Just imagine if it cost a dollar to print a dollar

i think there is no contest in energy and resources cost. Under any conceivable scenario fiat is cheaper than POW (for the printers).
Moreover your case about high real TX cost implies constant price, which is unlikely after many halvenings. And dirt cheap TX cost is not the btc killer app anyway imho.

My case for actual TX costs does not assume constant BTC price.  I simply state that current level of network security costs ~10% of Bitcoin's market cap.
This percentage should, theoretically, hold at any price level.  We're talking proportions.

Edit: My original post was made to counter an argument that Bitcoin transactions are exceptionally cheap.

[silkroadlover]

It's nice to know moderators are useless on this forum.

Luckily ignore functions as it should.

Doesn't change the fact that they're useless now does it?

Why do you feel like the mods are useless?

Do you even have eyes?

Yes. Now then, why do you feel like the mods are useless?

Show mods respect

[NotLambchop]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

Why?  It's been doing pretty much the opposite.

[octaft]

It's nice to know moderators are useless on this forum.

Luckily ignore functions as it should.

Doesn't change the fact that they're useless now does it?

Why do you feel like the mods are useless?

Do you even have eyes?

Yes. Now then, why do you feel like the mods are useless?

Show mods respect

Tell it to njcarlos, I have no problem with the level of moderation here, and don't think anyone is doing anything that would objectively warrant a ban. Props to the mods for having the discipline not to ban unpopular people.

[idecable]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

Why?  It's been doing pretty much the opposite.

Only makes sense to me that since more people uses Bitcoins that the price has more potential to grow.

[JorgeStolfi]

However, there is no feedback from the cost of production (or whatever the network is doing) to the price.  ... If the price goes up, or down, the hashrate will eventually follow, with a delay.  If accidents were to destroy half of the hashpower, the price would hardly be affeected.

There is no direct feedback but because the time constants for the two interacting systems are so different then there is an effective floor.

If accidents were to destroy half the hashpower the price would be immediately unaffected but if it were to drop down slowly over time it would not go much below the new cost of production. Because at that point it is cheaper for miners to buy on the market, e.g. to fulfill forward sales contracts, than to keep expending resources.  

The effective downside of bitcoin is therefore the cost of production, currently around $320-350 ...

OK, that is a feedback channel; but is it sufficient to hold the price?  Miners who have such long-range, inflexible contracts (are there any?) could simply indemnify their buyers (who are supposed to be long-range investors) in dollars, instead of spending dollars on the market to buy bitcoins to give to their buyers.  More likely, at that point they will not have enough money to do either, and will declare bankruptcy.

A good part of the hashpower is in pools, and most of the individal miners in those pools will not have a "mine or buy" requirement.  If lower price makes mining unprofitable, they would just stop mining.

In any case, if the price falls below the cost of production, both the hashrate and the difficulty will decrease, until the remaining miners are again barely profitable.  There is no hard 350 $/BTC bottom for the production cost, nor for the price (just as there wasn't in 2010).

[NotLambchop]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

Why?  It's been doing pretty much the opposite.

Only makes sense to me that since more people uses Bitcoins that the price has more potential to grow.

In an asset as manipulated as Bitcoin, the number of transactions doesn't necessarily correlate to the number of users, or even to transactions between individuals (moving coin between two addys you control, for instance, cold/hot wallets, etc.).  Reliable Bitcoin metrics are pretty difficult to come by (partially by design).

[supermancointhingyo]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

Why?  It's been doing pretty much the opposite.

Only makes sense to me that since more people uses Bitcoins that the price has more potential to grow.

In an asset as manipulated as Bitcoin, the number of transactions doesn't necessarily correlate to the number of users, or even to transactions between individuals (moving coin between two addys you control, for instance, cold/hot wallets, etc.).  Reliable Bitcoin metrics are pretty difficult to come by (partially by design).

Ever heard of the blockchain?

[ChartBuddy]

Explanation

[NotLambchop]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

Why?  It's been doing pretty much the opposite.

Only makes sense to me that since more people uses Bitcoins that the price has more potential to grow.

In an asset as manipulated as Bitcoin, the number of transactions doesn't necessarily correlate to the number of users, or even to transactions between individuals (moving coin between two addys you control, for instance, cold/hot wallets, etc.).  Reliable Bitcoin metrics are pretty difficult to come by (partially by design).

Ever heard of the blockchain?

Yes.  Care to explain yourself a bit?

[JorgeStolfi]

Would it make sense that knowing the total amount of daily transaction on the network keeps growing for the past 5 months https://blockchain.info/charts/n-transactions , that the BTC price would follow?

Well, what about these plots:
Estimated total transaction outputs minus changebacks, in BTC/day:
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume?showDataPoints=false&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&timespan=&scale=0

Ditto, in USD/day (the previous graph times the BTC market price):
https://blockchain.info/charts/estimated-transaction-volume-usd?showDataPoints=false&timespan=&show_header=true&daysAverageString=7&scale=0

I don't know what those plots show actually.

[JimboToronto]

...octogenarian sex orgies...

Sorry, no octogenarian orgies around here.

Just one sexagenarian dude with one quadragenarian chick at a time.

Now run along guttersnipe and go play with your Brony buttplugs.

[octaft]

Just one sexagenarian dude with one quadragenarian chick at a time.

How much do they charge?

[NotLambchop]

...octogenarian sex orgies...

Sorry, no octogenarian orgies around here.

Just one sexagenarian dude with one quadragenarian chick at a time.
...

Eww!
The thought of you getting all hopped up on erectile dysfunction pills, and feeding some of the drug to some poor aging woman, "for her pleasure" no doubt...
Have you no shame, monstrosity?

[Erdogan]

However , true story :

Let me explain what the difference is:
Money is sent via Western Union when cash is needed immediately.  This money is not sent for stuff like online purchases, otherwise the sender could simply make the purchase and have it shipped to a different address.

Sending Bitcoin is currently extremely cheap, because the miners are subsidised by 10% yearly inflation, AKA "block rewards" (not TX fees).  As block rewards diminish to zero over time, the miners will be forced to rely on TX fees.
Today, Bitcoin is paying 10% of its market cap to maintain the network--that's how many coins are mined in a year.  Once the block rewards approach zero, the transaction fees would have to represent ~10% of Bitcoin's market cap to maintain today's network security.  Because, as Satoshi has pointed out, the cost of mining should approach the price of coins mined.

Imagine that?  Burning 10% of world's wealth YEARLY being paid in TX fees?  

But that's a tangent.  The problem is, after receiving your bitcoin, it still must be converted to cash you can actually spend locally

Let's say one bitcoiner lived in for instance Burma, knew some merchants or pharmacists, for example and had some friends or acquaintances there, knew english. Maybe he had some cash to start a business. Could he find out who got remittances, what they used the money for, and maybe help them for a small profit?

[BoatsandBitcheswithBits]

It's nice to know moderators are useless on this forum.

Luckily ignore functions as it should.

What if they were the mods?